Page 292 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 292
What Do We Know about the World?
References
Alden, R. MacD. (1900). The Art of Debate, New York: Henry Holt and
Company.
Allen, M., S. Berkowitz, S. Hunt, and A. Louden (1999). A Meta-Anal-
ysis of the Impact of Forensics and Communication Education on
Critical Thinking. Communication Education, 48/1, 18–30.
Andrews, R. (1995). Teaching and Learning Argument, London: Cas-
selli.
Backer, T. (2010). Teaching Debate in Chile: “Age of Wisdom, Season
of Light, Spring of Hope”. http://www.scribd.com/doc/35530841/
Teaching-Debate-in-Chile-2010-Thomas-Baker (9. August 2012).
Barnard, R. H. (1937). The Evils of High School Debating. The Clearing
House, 13/4, 211–213.
Bellon, J. (2000). A Research-Based Justification for Debate Across the
Curriculum. Argumentation and Advocacy, 37/3, 161–175.
Blair, A. J. (1988). What is Bias? Govier, T. (ed.). Selected Issues in Logic
and Communication. Belmont: Wadsworth, 93–103.
Blomberg, T. G., W. D. Bales, and A. R. Piquero (2012). Is Educational
Achievement a Turning Point for Incarcerated Delinquents Across
Race and Sex? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41/2, 202–216.
Bono, E. de (1985). Six Thinking Hats, Boston: Little, Brown and Com-
pany.
Bonomo, H., J. M. Mamberti, and J. B. Miller (2010). Tolerancia críti-
ca y ciudadanía activa. Una introducción prática al debate educati-
vo, New York: IDEA.
Branham, R. (1991). Debate and Critical Analysis: The Harmony of Con-
flict, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brimble, J., and D. Pritchard (2003). Guide to Debating: The Principles
and Practice of Debate, Pontypridd: University of Glamorgan.
Broda-Bahm, K. (ed.) (2001). Perspectives in Controversy: Select Essays
From Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, New York: IDEA.
Budesheim, T. L., and A. R. Lundquist (1999). Consider the Opposite:
Opening Minds Trough In-Class Debates on Course-Related Con-
troversies. Teaching of Psychology, 27/2, 106–110.
Cattani, A. (2005). Subjectivist and Objectivist Interpretations of Con-
troversy-based Thought. Barrotta, P., and M. Dascal (eds.). Contro-
versies and Subjectivity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 185–200.
Chaiken, S., W. Wood, and A. H. Eagly (1996). Principles of Persua-
sion. Higgins, E. T., and A. W. Kruglanski (eds.). Social Psychology:
Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford, 702–742.
References
Alden, R. MacD. (1900). The Art of Debate, New York: Henry Holt and
Company.
Allen, M., S. Berkowitz, S. Hunt, and A. Louden (1999). A Meta-Anal-
ysis of the Impact of Forensics and Communication Education on
Critical Thinking. Communication Education, 48/1, 18–30.
Andrews, R. (1995). Teaching and Learning Argument, London: Cas-
selli.
Backer, T. (2010). Teaching Debate in Chile: “Age of Wisdom, Season
of Light, Spring of Hope”. http://www.scribd.com/doc/35530841/
Teaching-Debate-in-Chile-2010-Thomas-Baker (9. August 2012).
Barnard, R. H. (1937). The Evils of High School Debating. The Clearing
House, 13/4, 211–213.
Bellon, J. (2000). A Research-Based Justification for Debate Across the
Curriculum. Argumentation and Advocacy, 37/3, 161–175.
Blair, A. J. (1988). What is Bias? Govier, T. (ed.). Selected Issues in Logic
and Communication. Belmont: Wadsworth, 93–103.
Blomberg, T. G., W. D. Bales, and A. R. Piquero (2012). Is Educational
Achievement a Turning Point for Incarcerated Delinquents Across
Race and Sex? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41/2, 202–216.
Bono, E. de (1985). Six Thinking Hats, Boston: Little, Brown and Com-
pany.
Bonomo, H., J. M. Mamberti, and J. B. Miller (2010). Tolerancia críti-
ca y ciudadanía activa. Una introducción prática al debate educati-
vo, New York: IDEA.
Branham, R. (1991). Debate and Critical Analysis: The Harmony of Con-
flict, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brimble, J., and D. Pritchard (2003). Guide to Debating: The Principles
and Practice of Debate, Pontypridd: University of Glamorgan.
Broda-Bahm, K. (ed.) (2001). Perspectives in Controversy: Select Essays
From Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, New York: IDEA.
Budesheim, T. L., and A. R. Lundquist (1999). Consider the Opposite:
Opening Minds Trough In-Class Debates on Course-Related Con-
troversies. Teaching of Psychology, 27/2, 106–110.
Cattani, A. (2005). Subjectivist and Objectivist Interpretations of Con-
troversy-based Thought. Barrotta, P., and M. Dascal (eds.). Contro-
versies and Subjectivity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 185–200.
Chaiken, S., W. Wood, and A. H. Eagly (1996). Principles of Persua-
sion. Higgins, E. T., and A. W. Kruglanski (eds.). Social Psychology:
Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford, 702–742.
